This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2014-09-22 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| The Labor Code draws a fine line between regular and casual employees to protect the interests of labor. We ruled in Baguio Country Club Corporation v. NLRC[22] that "its language evidently manifests the intent to safeguard the tenurial interest of the worker who may be denied the rights and benefits due a regular employee by virtue of lopsided agreements with the economically powerful employer who can maneuver to keep an employee on a casual status for as long as convenient." Thus, notwithstanding any agreements to the contrary, what determines whether a certain employment is regular or casual is not the will and word of the employer, to which the desperate worker often accedes, much less the procedure of hiring the employee or the manner of paying his salary. It is the nature of the activities performed in relation to the particular business or trades considering all circumstances, and in some cases the length of time of its performance and its continued existence.[23] | |||||